The power of speaking up

National MP Maggie Barry says more than a dozen New Zealand women have approached her to say they were also indecently assaulted by disgraced entertainer Rolf Harris — and one is considering an official complaint to police after decades of silence.

Ms Barry revealed yesterday that she was groped by Harris in a Palmerston North recording studio when she was working as a journalist.

This is the great thing about being brave enough to reveal what someone like Harris did to you. Suddenly everyone else who has had it happen to them, doesn’t feel quite so alone. It’s great that they now have someone they can share their stories with – of course would be greater if this had never happened. If a dozen have contacted Maggie Barry, how many scores more may be out there?

Former TVNZ makeup artist Lee Howden told RadioLIVE she was also sexually assaulted as she did his make-up for an on-air interview. She said she fled the room after he put his hand into her underwear.

While she never reported the incident, she was inspired to come forward after hearing Ms Barry’s account and was prepared to make an official police complaint.

Nookin

Wiki. I think you should read the thread. Judith is suggesting that Barrie could have stopped all the abuse had she spoken out at the time. She says that if Barrie had spoken up when Harris was charged he would have had the white flag up in surrender and pleaded guilty — thereby relieving other complainants of the torment of a trial.

Her logic does not stack up.

One might wonder what might have happened had she spoken up. To pose a theory is one thing. To ask a question, give a definitive answer, condemn Barrie and berate anyone who disagrees is something else.

Then, on top of it all, she attributes any contrary view to political motivation.

Manolo

ShawnLH

“He can’t help himself. Its pointless trying to reason with someone whose comments here show a glaring immunity to that quality.

For example, if you don’t agree with him that complainants speaking out after the event are “brave”, you’re someone who supports child molesting.”

Well, do you Red? You seem to think that the opposite of a feminist girly-man is one who supports or approves or soft soaps child molesters.

So do ya wimpy?

“Or another example, complaining about name calling while calling someone “Rednutter”.”

It’s not the name calling wimpy, it’s substituting an actual argument with name calling.

It’s what stupid people do.

“A particularly stark example of illogic when its used in the context of his claim to be a “true” Conservative, when the tactic of categorising your political opponents as insane stems from Lenin’s communist kangaroo courts after the Russian Revolution.”

Exactly the tactics you use wimpy. Anyone who does not fit your version of Conservatism gets labled a prog or a socialist or a traitor, or all three.

If you disgree with the tactic, why do you use it so much? You use it way more than any Lefty on this blog. Perhaps ya need to come out of the closet wimpy and admit your half a goose step away from being a Stalinist.

“There are all kinds who comment on the internet.”

Yup, including wimpy cowards like you.

“In choosing who to engage with, you really need to sort the wheat from the chaff”

How would you know which is which? That would require thinking. You clearly don’t do a lot of that.

Accusing anyone who supports the victims of a child abuser and a predate as “feminist girly-men” is a monumentally stupid argument displaying zero intellectual ability, and a great deal of mental retardation.

If you are gonna talk dumbass shite, don’t whine when your called on it, wimpy. 🙂

Spawn
Don’t take redtard so personally
He has as about as much creditability as a black man at a KKK convention.
I value him for the light comic relief he adds to an over wise serious political blog.
It is imposable that someone could be genuinely so self deluded as to be unaware of the humor value in the extremism he posts daily

named after its author Nathan Poe, is an Internet adage reflecting the idea that without a clear indication of the author’s intent, it is difficult or impossible to tell the difference between an expression of sincere extremism and a parody of extremism

ShawnLH

There are multiple victims from around the world, all who have testified, and in which their descriptions of Rolf and his tactics are all in agreement. He had child porn on his computer, and when questioned claimed it got their by accident. Yeah, THAT’S credible! On top of that, his own words betray him.

The guy is as guilty as sin. This is clear. So it beggars the question, why are people trying to excuse him? What kind of mentality thinks this is an excusable offense? What kind of morally retarded nutjob thinks that men opposing the sexual abuse of young girls makes them feminist girly men?

Face it sunshine – your position comes from your own political bias too. I didn’t see you supporting Cunliffe, when he spoke up about victims of domestic abuse. You’re such a pathetic hypocrite, and so bloody obvious.

Nookin

Judith
You did not see me decrying him, either. And guess what? That is the test — applying one principle to one person and another principle to someone else — like you do – constantly. That is the meaning of hypocrisy.